Yes I've read that before. That doesn't mean anything. Actions speak louder than words, especially when it comes to shroud businesses, and in terms of actions (and actual reality of the situation) Sony is way more likely for a crossover than X-Men. Not that either one has any iota of happening anyway. Feige said just the other day that it's not happening any time soon.

With FOX controlling the film rights of Disney IPs and paying a pittance for its exploitation of the FF and X Men universes, I would suggest that an Avengers/JL crossover is much more likely than any of the FOX properties being introduced into the MCU. At least until Disney gets the rights back.

In regards to Spidey, both Disney and Sony are facing a problem around 2018. Both the Garfield Spider-man series and the RDJ led Avengers trilogy will be coming to an end. At that time Disney and Sony may be forced to collaborate, with a new version of Spidey (Mike Morales?) featured in both an updated Sony trilogy and a fresh set of Avengers films.

since a prison break was mentioned, i wonder if there isn't some illegal experimentation going on; using extremis? Thunderbolt Ross was willing to do it to Blonsky. maybe someone higher up signed off on it. or it might even be an enemy of the marvel U.S. conducting the experiments. i wish that they would work Zemo into this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Dent

Where was a prison break mentioned? Wardell's tweet?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jonathancrane

@Crimson King:

True.
-------

Yeah, the prison break scenario was from a tweet by the troll Wardell.

In regards to Spidey, both Disney and Sony are facing a problem around 2018. Both the Garfield Spider-man series and the RDJ led Avengers trilogy will be coming to an end. At that time Disney and Sony may be forced to collaborate, with a new version of Spidey (Mike Morales?) featured in both an updated Sony trilogy and a fresh set of Avengers films.

"Forced" is too strong a word, but Marvel Studios will likely be looking at continuing the Avengers series without any of the Big Three of Downey, Hemsworth and Evans. Though they can recast, it would be very risky. Around the same time Garfield may be hanging up his tights, so Sony will be looking at a second reboot within ten years. This is also quite risky given the box office drop from the original Raimi trilogy to Webb's reboot.

One way to reduce the risk to both studios is to put Spidey on the Avengers roster, giving the team the star power it needs to keep the billion dollar box office returns coming in, while also creating new stories for his solo films. Given the past deals between the two companies and the oft reported strong relationship, I would be surprised if they don't collaborate at some time. I think 2018 will be that time.

So what does everyone want in the avengers sequel?
I'd like to see some more fight scenes that feature more than 2 heroes at a time, like the whole team together more often. Also, a different style of cinematography would be nice. Something closer to Thor 2 than the first thor

So what does everyone want in the avengers sequel?
I'd like to see some more fight scenes that feature more than 2 heroes at a time, like the whole team together more often. Also, a different style of cinematography would be nice. Something closer to Thor 2 than the first thor

More interactions between each other to show that they're not government-controlled soldiers and turning them into the Avengers from the comics

__________________Twitter: @Jasper_CH

I still believe in heroes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by terry78

"I tell ya, that Jennifer Lawrenshinch, I'd like to put my olive in her martini."

So what does everyone want in the avengers sequel?
I'd like to see some more fight scenes that feature more than 2 heroes at a time, like the whole team together more often. Also, a different style of cinematography would be nice. Something closer to Thor 2 than the first thor

I agree, and I'd like to see them learn to work together better so they can play off each other's powers etc. We saw a little of that but it was mainly smaller isolated events and this should be the movie when they really become a team.

I'm also interested to see how they will view S.H.I.E.L.D. after the issues that were the last time and since Coulson might be back by then. While I want the team to really be a team it's always interesting with conflict on "the same side" and this could be what provides that.

On a more individual basis I hope that Thor gets some more big power moments. He seemed a bit in the background for being the big gun in the first one.

"Forced" is too strong a word, but Marvel Studios will likely be looking at continuing the Avengers series without any of the Big Three of Downey, Hemsworth and Evans. Though they can recast, it would be very risky. Around the same time Garfield may be hanging up his tights, so Sony will be looking at a second reboot within ten years. This is also quite risky given the box office drop from the original Raimi trilogy to Webb's reboot.

One way to reduce the risk to both studios is to put Spidey on the Avengers roster, giving the team the star power it needs to keep the billion dollar box office returns coming in, while also creating new stories for his solo films. Given the past deals between the two companies and the oft reported strong relationship, I would be surprised if they don't collaborate at some time. I think 2018 will be that time.

Sony will most likely not reboot Spider-Man again. They said they want to map out a massive Spider-Man universe with the current reboot, just like the Marvel did with their own cinematic universe. What would be the point of doing that if you're just going to reboot everything in a couple of years? There would be none.

Sony will most likely not reboot Spider-Man again. They said they want to map out a massive Spider-Man universe with the current reboot, just like the Marvel did with their own cinematic universe. What would be the point of doing that if you're just going to reboot everything in a couple of years? There would be none.

How big of a universe could they really make though? Do they own the rights to any other heroes worth putting in a big collaborative movie with Spider-Man?

Tell them to let it go. Does it cause them physical pain to focus on the characters Marvel owns?

Here we have this fantastic product and it's like guys are so unthankful for it, they're conjuring up the most UNLIKELIEST of scenarios you could ever present .... and they taint all the various Marvel film threads on here with it. I mean c'mon we're recently finding out about budget/salary issues and you want to drag in not only another film company's stars, but another film company itself too (who will surely want a cut of the action)?????? I can't even find a facepalm large enough for that.

We have an MCU. Marvel Films has THEIR slate of characters that they own. It's time people grow up and accept that. Concentrate on what they have and the possibilities. Then again, I am addressing a lot of hardcore fanboys who's imaginations will not allow that to happen.

Just a very unappreciative bunch IMO.

So because I'm interested in this concept also I am now unappreciative of and unthankful for what Marvel have done despite my thousands of posts to the contrary (still all out there for reference if interested), of which I'm sure you've read a fair number? Ah yeah, thanks buddy

No. But they want to map out a massive universe for Spider-Man where any of his villains could exist, any of his stories can happen, etc.

Why would they do that and then reboot? It wouldn't be a smart move at all. We will probably see the franchise continue like James Bond does, which is the same thing Marvel plans to do with the MCU.

Heck, if the chances of Spider-Man being integrated into the MCU end up true, then they will definitely not reboot anytime soon.

Map out a universe where they all could exist, sure. But how many movies could they do with so many re-casts? They would all basically be reboots to some degree. And with James Bond, his age isn't an issue. But Peter Parker's age would be.

I see them basically doing multiple tellings of the Spider-Man story, all in its own universe.

We had Raimi's Spider-Man, with Green Goblin, Doctor Octopus, Venom, Sandman and a new Goblin.

We will have Webb's Spider-Man, with Lizard, Electro, Rhino, and potentially another version of Green Goblin, etc.

Maybe in another 8 or so years, we'll have another telling, where we get Scorpion, Mysterio, Venom and Carnage. Who knows?

I just have a feeling they'll have multiple reboots until what is essentially the end of time. Comic book movies are very different that James Bond movies. With Bond movies, you can just create another random spy villain and roll with current political issues in the world. With comic book movies, you will eventually run out of villains and have to either reuse or create new villains (which we know everyone is against, see New Goblin and whatever you want to call that "Whiplash" character was in Iron Man 2. I know Whiplash was a real character, but I think you get my point).

Map out a universe where they all could exist, sure. But how many movies could they do with so many re-casts? They would all basically be reboots to some degree. And with James Bond, his age isn't an issue. But Peter Parker's age would be.

I see them basically doing multiple tellings of the Spider-Man story, all in its own universe.

We had Raimi's Spider-Man, with Green Goblin, Doctor Octopus, Venom, Sandman and a new Goblin.

We will have Webb's Spider-Man, with Lizard, Electro, Rhino, and potentially another version of Green Goblin, etc.

Maybe in another 8 or so years, we'll have another telling, where we get Scorpion, Mysterio, Venom and Carnage. Who knows?

I just have a feeling they'll have multiple reboots until what is essentially the end of time. Comic book movies are very different that James Bond movies. With Bond movies, you can just create another random spy villain and roll with current political issues in the world. With comic book movies, you will eventually run out of villains and have to either reuse or create new villains (which we know everyone is against, see New Goblin and whatever you want to call that "Whiplash" character was in Iron Man 2. I know Whiplash was a real character, but I think you get my point).

I doubt Peter will be that much older than now by TASM 3. Both TASM 1 and 2 take place in Peter's senior year of high school. The timeline isn't moving that fast. Sony even said that part of the reason why they rebooted was because they felt they grew up Peter Parker way too fast in the old franchise. They'll take their time with Peter's age. He will probably still be in college even when movie 6 rolls around. Once that point comes (which won't be for a good while), you do what Marvel currently thinks is impossible to do: You tell stories of an adult Peter Parker.

You will only run out of villains if you're under the assumption that you have to kill off villains. Sure that that will be necessary once in a while but most don't have to die. The comics still tell strong stories to this day due to that.

So because I'm interested in this concept also I am now unappreciative of and unthankful for what Marvel have done despite my thousands of posts to the contrary (still all out their for reference if interested), of which I'm sure you've read a fair number? Ah yeah, thanks buddy

That's kind of how I felt. I guess I'll just keep my dreams of NFL SuperPro appearing in the MCU to myself from now on.

__________________

"That was the edge Parker had; he knew that survival was more important than heroics. It isn't how you play the game, it's whether you win or lose.”
~ Richard Stark, Deadly Edge

“Well, I decided I was going to Google Alert myself on Thanos, so I basically don’t know anything more than anyone else does. But I do get Google Alerts, and this past week Joss Whedon did an interview that said he was just going to have…apparently Thanos plays sort of a good role inside the Guardians, he has a minor role, like he’s the backup players in Avengers 2, and he’s going to at least be in Avengers 3. So they look like they are going to try to milk him for everything he’s worth, as long as they can. So I know he’s going to be in at least three movies.”

No. But they want to map out a massive universe for Spider-Man where any of his villains could exist, any of his stories can happen, etc.

Why would they do that and then reboot? It wouldn't be a smart move at all. We will probably see the franchise continue like James Bond does, which is the same thing Marvel plans to do with the MCU.

Heck, if the chances of Spider-Man being integrated into the MCU end up true, then they will definitely not reboot anytime soon.

Well said. They are building towards the Sinister Six (à la the Avengers) and beyond.... If you don't kill off villans like Raimi did, you can use them again. Just like they do in the comics.

For the MCU casting, I think Marvel should do a massive recast after TA3. No mismatching new actors with the old ones. A clean slate across the board is the way to go. Same universe with a whole new coat of paint. Marvel's universe and it's characters are the real draw here, not the actors. If they cast the characters well, the audience will accept the new faces in short order. Guaranteed.

So because I'm interested in this concept also I am now unappreciative of and unthankful for what Marvel have done despite my thousands of posts to the contrary (still all out there for reference if interested), of which I'm sure you've read a fair number? Ah yeah, thanks buddy

Yes.

Stop whining.

Enjoy the MCU being constructed and stop trying to suggest some cockamamie multi-film studio project.

Has this been discussed yet? but do you think the events of Iron Man 3 will be referenced and perhaps an explanation of why shield and the other avengers didn't take any actions?

I mean at one point tony stark is presumed dead, you'd think that would set off someone's radar over there? Not to mention the whole presidential crises, wouldn't captain america want to take part in that?